dharma धर्म in the brain model

[syn_mail]

Dear friends,

A computational model asserts various quantitative definitions.

One of the principals is the commonly used word धर्म .  In the

model, it is cosmological. It stems from the property through which

the perceived universe is maintained.  The universe has semi-permanent

features which have much longer time scales than the human perceptual

time scale.  All such features are सत् and नित्य.  सत्  has a property which

is  सत्त्व that maintains the धर्म | सत् objects and सत्त्व principles are mapped

in the human brain as a part of evolution.  They are coded in the human

genetic material and transferred to the baby.  The fundamental part of 

this genetic property is non-discrimination, accepting all as a part of the

universe.   At a certain point (possibly about two years, I am still computing)

"I" develops and we confine ourselves in "I" that lets us distinguish ourselves

from the universe.  "I" has the ability to create linguistic objects and memory, 

but they don't become सत् or नित्य.

There are many such nuanced concepts used in the model.  I write these

to clear my mind and elicit feedback.

Best regards,

Bijoy Misra

Camp-Cuttack, Odisha  

[BVK Sastry (G-S-Pop)]

Namaste Misra ji

 

I am responding on the pointer made by you reading : < I write these to clear my mind and elicit feedback >.

 

The trigger came from your observation : < "I" has the ability to create linguistic objects and memory, > < चित्त-वृत्ति -  पदार्थ-धर्म   स्मृति > .   

 

I am doing a similar exploration, sharing in this response , which I am pursuing to build nuanced model of  ‘ < सत्त्व that maintains the धर्म> < of  भाषा  > .  

In modern Language-Tech Terms: Panini Samskrutham  Language- Model (LLM) as base of Panini-Samskruth Conversational Artificial Intelligence.

 

I am drawing the inspiration for this ‘Computational model’ from Gita.

 

The Technical paired term < Purusha- Prakruti> < provides the needed  <quantitative definitions > and < Connection clarity of Computation to Cognition.   This ‘Samkhya system of Consciousness Science Analytics = < सांख्य- योग- दर्शन>  has used the duality of measure.

 

‘Prakruti’  is the key term I have been exploring from the context of Gita (7-4).  This is a common term with multiple pointers; some  are < cosmological >.

 

The < universe of < भाषा >  - loosely translated as ‘ Language’, which is again loosely segmented as ‘Human and Gods Languages’  have semi-permanent features. These ‘Human <  सामाजिक – लोक >   and Gods <  देव -  छन्दस् >  Languages’  have much longer time scales than the human perceptual time scale in the < perceived universe, where they are  maintained for usage > . 

The < cognition and experience, memory of short and long term > as < भाषा >  सत्त्व that maintains < भाषा धर्म> - and Name-Form-Function-Principles are mappable in the human architecture and structure, methods and processes ( may not be necessarily localized to ‘brain’).  

The fundamental axiom of  this ‘‘Prakruti’  -  property is non-discrimination, accepting all as a part of the universe. 

 

"I" (अहं -कार – 8^th listed item in Gita 7-4) develops and we (वयम्) confine ourselves in "I" (अहं) that lets us distinguish ourselves (भेद- योग-विभाग - द्वैत ) from the universe (विशव). This is  where the ‘Language < भाषा >   shifts from ‘ Human to Transcendental < अतीन्द्रिय > Plane  with unique <  सत्त्व and  धर्म of  >.

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

-------------

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CALw-kjVkadmSQ_wTuypT-Rb3KOaeU5hCB0DLUYVPF59PZsXtRg%40mail.gmail.com.

[syn_mail]

Dear Dr BVK,

Thank you for the work.  There is a difference.

According to the model thinking, भा is सत्त्व, but भाषा is not.  सत्त्व has to be a natural object based property.  It's the object's existence.  

All the receptor (man, animal) can do is to perceive and accept the existence (सत्) .  सत् is only comprehended.  In सत् the receptor is with the universe, not different.  The development of "I" is a process to distinguish oneself to interpret the object सत्, and this involves भाषा, which is local.  The syllable वर्ण can be नित्य, when it is without "I", purely neurological.  The वर्ण set is due to human biology but the full neurological set has to be discovered.  It is possible that the full set of वर्ण has the capacity to describe all features in the universe, but we have to check how much is acoustically heard.  Similarly we have to assert that the universe has a transmission mode through which we connect. This mode is possibly acoustic, because of the space involved.

The beauty is that all this is variously hinted at different locations in the Gita and other books.  Language objects have been created.

We try to explore the physical meaning behind the language objects.  A good  वर्ण theory would help.  I am exploring some old

tantra literature in Odisha.

Best regards,

Bijoy Misra      

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/05e901dc98a5%246ef8b0d0%244cea1270%24%40gmail.com.

[BVK Sastry (G-S-Pop)]

Namaste

 

Thanks.

 

I am contemplating :  

< भा is सत्त्व,>   Object Reality, as ‘ Padartha- Dravya’.

< भाषा>  is LANGUAGE- DESCRIPTOR OF < < भा is सत्त्व,>   Object Reality, as ‘ Padartha- Dravya’. >  A way to EXPRESS – THOUGHT / EXPERIENCE.

 

In this sense, Samskrutham/ Bhashaa and Chandas together are ‘ Language Cognition and Expression of < सत्त्व,>   Object Reality, with a ‘Dharma’. >

This is ‘Tradition’ and ‘Science of Yoga’.  It is NOT academia of ‘ IE linguistics’ and Social language conversation .

 

Still axioms to explore, even though texts present it as ‘Conclusion by Cognition’.

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CALw-kjWkdwZ1uX0NBWFPnUptMq7m1dm3HnMVfqh6HKDdS9F%3DVQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[syn_mail]

Dear Dr BVK,

सत्त्व  has no भू in it.  it simply exists (अस्ति by default).  अस्ति is the बोध, it is not an expression.

Comprehension is a neurological state where objects only exist (they are equipartitioned in energy).

One can question how the brain makes up an object (is a tree different than the forest etc).

Here धर्म would apply.  धर्म is empirical, I have not gone that far.  

It could be said that an object is defined by the amount of information (a sort of physical constant).

One needs a constant quantity for equipartition. But it is neuronal and analog.  Definitions will

come through language after "I" is established.  "I" is a neurological state that we all operate in.

We create a linguistic universe very different than the real universe.  We use words without

understanding their depth or implications, it is possibly because we don't give enough processing 

time to visualize.  In a more artificial state, we use words through imitation (learning). (we talk about

India having never been to India, or we talk about the Himalayas never having perceived it.)  

Best regards,

Bijoy Misra

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/081401dc98c1%24b25a88a0%24170f99e0%24%40gmail.com.

[syn_mail]

Dr BVK,

I had written about the vedic शं state earlier.  It is a living, low-energy state.  

Because it is living, it should have some vibration which in principle can be detected.

But only through organic methods, not by instruments.

Sorry that I am talking about physics concepts in philosophy, but we can to create 

a cosmological model of speech.

Regards,

Bijoy Misra